The Infatuation With Evil

The problem of evil centers on the problem of knowledge, and the fact that the human being lives and dies by what they know.

Think about that. The mole or the rabbit lives and dies in a similar way; the mole is evolved to live in the ground and the rabbit is constructed to
move in brisk and subtle ways. The animal is the living idea, because the living world expresses the arcane meanings of the spiritual nature of
existence.

We are all expressions - living symbols - even though so few of us really understand the degree to which reality could bend to our will.

But is the human itself? Is the human expressing its semiotic uniqueness as a being that is built to chart its own inner and outer territory? Or is it
mired in the products of its own millennia long veering into the sitra achra - the other side?

Evil is a problem because it is blasphemously stupid. The person who believes in it is necessarily ill educated - lacking necessary knowledge of
how-things-actually work. The person has been baited into a state where the point-counterpoint condition of being is not noticed; the asymmetry of the
evil thought - the asymmetry of the summoned demon, is an asymmetry of perception, of being, of semiotic capital; the time we spend enthralled by such
evil necessarily puts our biological rhythms out of sync with the continuum that is nature and the universe; we break out, because we break from
our own nature, which is to chart our inner territory.

But do we do that? Or are we mired in the confusion of society and its vain clichés? We don't see the clichés because we haven't a coherent way of
representing what we are doing. A sort of insanity of arbitrariness exists in the minds of people who collude in their mutual affirmations of what is
an insanely dysregulated and disaccounting way of being.

I think the Hindu assumption that the adterlife experience depends on the body and that eliminating the body elimates that aspect of the afterlife
experience to be insanely naive. Numbers can help us think about it: The one is the universe in itself, and so is the universe in its wholeness as a
semiotic-being. The human being, on the other hand, is a product of twoness, insomuch as our inner experinece is modelled on the
communicator-listerner dialogue, and so is the experience of one human communicating with another human. The human is dialogical, which is why the
states we experience on the inside are so transferrable and mimetic; it seems as if the states we produce are the "thing" that evolves, whereas our
individual observing consciousness is that which experiences the semiotic consequences of how it is we handle the meanings of our personal existential
processes, as well as how we honor the fact that every state we experience - good or bad - is due to an environmental affordance - a force - which
equipped us with the capacity we later on took to be an "inherent" feature of our personality - something we call "temperament".

Interaction is assimilation of "information' or "meaning". Power - age - is often a major factor, as in the mother-infant relationship, or
child-older sibling relationship. What is transferred is something called a "self-state". It is a context based phenomenon in which the person
watching another person speak or do something takes on the same motivational-perspectival state at a later time that seems to have animated the person
he observed in a similar situation. Every one of us has a feeling of "doing something like so and so", and this is what I mean. Our minds replicate
states and select states on the basis of what those states afford in given situations; every negative experience necessarily recognizes its opposite
state, and aims to equip the self with "defenses" against known threats by absorbing self-states from others who show those positive affordances
i.e. bravado, charisma, is respected, kind, intelligent etc, depending on the cultural context, different values will be highlighted, and so different
values assimilated. The point is, the social context situates a value in the social context so that the developing self iteratively absorbs and
assimilates the self-states or "symbols of being human" which give rise to those states which come to value and feel the need for whatever it is
that's valued.

And this is where value comes into the picture. What is a true human value? Savetri Devi, as an example, would have said that Shiva is a true value;
and that the Shiva-Shakti relationship is one of beauty in destruction. And all this symbolism and metaphysical harlotry amounts to nothing more than
a psychopathic projection of all her dissociated early life experiences that steered her consciousness to one of constant disillusion. It takes merely
three years and than a negative context for an entire life to become one dedicated to a hateful and vile belief system based in veritably demonstrable
experiences and situations that, contrary to her histrionic embellishments of reality, do not need to exist, and thus, do not have to be real
existential feelings-of-being. "If my comrades are not destined to rule the world, then away with it! A shower of atom bombs upon it and in place of
its meaningless chatter about "love" and "peace" the voice of the howling winds over its ruins." She says this even though other people
experience "love" and "peace" as a perfectly desirable state of affairs. Why does this fissure exist - why do they - the psychopath - so
unflinchingly hold to an illusion about reality?

The one is Love. Reason - or the universe - or the Logos - evolves according to cause and effect, and in our little corner of the milky way galaxy,
our planet has provided conditions for a lifeform to emerge which has come to evolve towards the omega point. Love - reason - is the ultimate logic of
how our bodies work and how all living beings operate. It is the logic of three - or the circle i.e. pi. It is only love that allows this, even
though, paradoxically, the process of life begins - and always continue to operate from - the condition for individual self-preservation.

But humans can indeed see above this. It is a sad delusion that anyone can let themselves think evil is necessary. It isn't.

I find people seem to scatter when 'its time' to talk about our inner 'demons' that influence us on subjects like political science. I've taken to
calling it Our Own, Personal, Boogeyman.

It's the "evil" in humans in particular when this goes on.

I realize there's a huge argument that evil isnt "real", and yet when scouring history and present its as if its the realest thing that ever was too
damn often.

No doubt when just looking at various pop culture, so many seem to get off vicariously on it in entertainment.

Which reminds me of similar parallels where people get off on vanity. Vanity which too often leads to 'evil' behavior, the elitists types 'spitting
on', laughing at the underclasses.

How the poor excuse their behaviors along these lines, greed especially, just because they want to be like that even though they never will be in such
a position because of the 'station' where greed (from above) itself has them boxed in especially when they fall for the game of attempts at vanity &
lavishness that the elites have conned us all into blowing our teent tiny bit of 'wealth' on.

One problem is people's relationships with hardwired biological addictions apart of an evolutionary
genetic condition called being human.

The whole experience is unfortunately one of turmoil because when all evils are no more and the protagonist, villains virus's
infections are gone...people still miss them and want them like drugs!

It is the recipe for evolution actually and propagation of higher order over time...At one time about 100 yrs ago child
pornography and inappropriate relationships with children were often overlooked when homosexuality was treated like that issue now!!!

Burn them at the stake eh???

So...A matter of time and what was totally evil now later will be divine maybe and so on...it gets very convoluted after
awhile!

Is the fact that cells divide and multiply from a destructive evil and life baring
force dancing together in creation and that's the only way we get life here in our Universe of Entropy anyway!

What if Life Were a Heavenly Cruise where Evil didn't exist and there were no real challenges???

Would we still be alive...entertained...generating and learning about how to evolve and make a
better quality of life???

Could that be the Real Evil....Lazily picking fruit from the trees with no mind and care
in the world and nothing going on??

While anyone that would come along would go there is our fruit just ripe for the picking
and so easy too???

Not sure if you are joking about the mouse in your CV but if so
a sachet of Lavender sure seem to keep them out of my minivan. I had three mouse nests under the hood (I live in the sticks)
and they sure hate those sachets!!

For a while now, I've been considering that the general societal definitions of "good" and "evil" are directly related to whether or not a particular
activity either supports or is detrimental to ordinary people being able to breed in relative peace such that new generations are created. Society's
goal is DNA's goal to continue to successfully breed and exist through time. Anything that gets in the way of that is "evil." At least for your
particular social group. If keeping your family, state, country safe to procreate is threatened by another family, state, country, then it's on like
Donkey Kong. Time to fight!

So, I suppose we're fascinated by evil because we have to keep a watch out for it, but also because we kind of understand that evil depends on your
perspective, and that we can suddenly be labeled evil if the societal winds change. Like smokers. Used to be they were good, now they're evil.
Funny how that happens.

"I do not point to the evil and pain of existence with the finger of reproach, but rather entertain the hope that life may one day become more evil
and more full of suffering than it has ever been."
Friedrich Nietzsche
(1844-1900)

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.